Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37646043›Full record

ArticleIntegrative medicine research2023

Complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine-specific COVID-19 misinformation on social media: A scoping review.

Jeremy Y Ng, Shawn Liu, Ishana Maini, Will Pereira, Holger Cramer, David Moher

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Integrative medicine research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jeremy Y NgCentre for Journalology, Ottawa Methods Centre, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Shawn LiuDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Ishana MainiDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Will PereiraDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Holger CramerInstitute of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
David MoherCentre for Journalology, Ottawa Methods Centre, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Impact · CABosch Health CampusOttawa Hospital · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The sharing of health-related information has become increasingly popular on social media. Unregulated information sharing has led to the spread of misinformation, especially regarding complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM). This scoping review synthesized evidence surrounding the spread of CAIM-related misinformation on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This review was informed by a modified version of the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework. AMED, EMBASE, PsycINFO and MEDLINE databases were searched systematically from inception to January 2022. Eligible articles explored COVID-19 misinformation on social media and contained sufficient information on CAIM therapies. Common themes were identified using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Results: Twenty-eight articles were included. The following themes were synthesized: 1) misinformation prompts unsafe and harmful behaviours, 2) misinformation can be separated into different categories, 3) individuals are capable of identifying and refuting CAIM misinformation, and 4) studies argue governments and social media companies have a responsibility to resolve the spread of COVID-19 misinformation. Conclusions: Misinformation can spread more easily when shared on social media. Our review suggests that misinformation about COVID-19 related to CAIM that is disseminated online contributes to unsafe health behaviours, however, this may be remedied via public education initiatives and stricter media guidelines. The results of this scoping review are crucial to understanding the behavioural impacts of the spread of COVID-19 misinformation about CAIM therapies, and can inform the development of public health policies to mitigate these issues.

Indexed as

Alternative medicineComplementaryCOVID-19Integrative medicineMisinformationSocial media

Identifiers

PMID37646043
PMCPMC10460953
OpenAlexW4384206973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.